St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1887-12-29
UTAH'S CLAIM.

Utah, with a constitution in its hand,
is knocking at the door of congress ask
ing admission as a state into the federal
union. 1t makes prOffer of the state
constitution adopted at Salt Lake City
last July as evidence that the territ0ry's
intentions are honorable, and that it
does not purpose to first get into the
union and then establish pOlygamOus
system afterwards. The twelfth section
of the fifteenth article declares
that bigamy and pOlygamy are
considered Incompatible with a
republican form of government, and
each of them is forbidden and
declared to he miSdemeanOr. A pen
atty for violation of this section is at
tached prescribing a punishment by
fine not exceeding 81, 900 and imprisOn-
ment for term not less than six months
nor more than three years. In their
memorial to congress the people of the
territory say that the special provisions
adopted in reference to practices that
are condemned by the popular voice
were made in good faith and SO worded
as to be practically unrepealable. The
twelfth section provides that it shall
not be amended, revised or in any way
changed without being approved and
ratified by congress, and that such
approval and ratification be pro-
claimed by the president of
the United States. That all looks
fair enough on the face of it, and there
is only one trouble about it There is
an appearance of mental reservation
on the part of these memorialists by
which they do not mean to give an hon
est enforcement of the twelfth section.
1t is right as general proposition to
question the motives of anybody, but in
this instance there are special reasons
for exciting suspicion as to the honest
intentions of these poly gamists. In the
bill of rights, which is the first article of
the proposed Utah constitution, it is
affirmed that the right to worship God
according to the dictates of conscience
shall not be infringed, nor shall
shall the state make any law in
terfering with the right of conscience
Under this section the Mormon church
would continue to exist, with all its
horrid features. But in addition to this
this same section provides that no re-
ligiouS test shall be required for any
Office of public trust, nor for any vote
at any election, nor shall any person be
incompetent to testify on account of
religious belief or absence thereof. The
meaning of all this is that, in state
where polygamy is religious belief
with nine-tenths of the people. the con-
stituti0nal provision against polygamy
would be practically rugatory. In con-
firmation OF this view we have the ex-
perience of the Utah commits
siOn's attempt to enforce the sup
Elemental act of March 8, 1887,
which provided that no polygamiSt or
bigamist should be entitled to vote or
register at any election in the territory.
And yet in the face of that provision
the bulk OF the Mormon population
came forward, took the registration
oath, and voted just as if there had
been no prohibitory legislation. That
is why we say that congress will be dis
posed to question the honesty OF the
Utah MOrmOnS in their professions of
willingness to have the state constitu-
ton discriminate against polygamy.